run_mcpt_pipeline

Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?

Annotations already indicate the tool is not read-only and not destructive. The description adds detail on the pipeline steps (decay, graduate, audit, listing, slack) and that it calls a script, but does not disclose side effects like state changes, auth requirements, or what happens to existing data. With annotations present, the description provides moderate added context.

Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

The description is two sentences long, front-loads the purpose, and lists steps efficiently. Every sentence adds value with no redundancy.

Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

For a pipeline execution tool with annotations and no output schema, the description covers the steps and script path. It is fairly complete but could mention expected outputs or error behaviors. The lack of distinction from sibling tools is a minor gap.

Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

The schema has 33% description coverage (only dry_run has a description). The description lists some step names ('decay', 'graduate', 'audit', 'listing', 'slack') but the step enum also includes 'all' and 'sync', which are not explained. It adds some meaning beyond the schema but does not fully document all parameters.

Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

The description clearly states it runs the 'MCPT marketplace autopilot pipeline' and lists the steps, providing a specific verb and resource. However, the sibling tool 'run_marketplace_autopilot' has a very similar name and likely overlaps in purpose, reducing differentiation.

Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

No guidance is provided on when to use this tool versus alternatives, such as the similar 'run_marketplace_autopilot'. The description omits context about prerequisites, exclusivity, or recommended conditions for invocation.

Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.